Pelosi: 'Iraq War Is Weakening Our Ability to Fight the War on Terrorism'

[Omaha Steve]

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=71571

Pelosi: 'Iraq War Is Weakening Our Ability to Fight the War on Terrorism'

8/31/2006 2:07:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Brendan Daly of the Office of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, 202-226-7616

WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 /U.S. Newswire/ -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on President Bush's speech in Salt Lake City to the American Legion:

"Today, once again, President Bush demonstrated that he is in denial about his historic blunder in Iraq. We must win the war on terror, but the war in Iraq is the wrong war. Today, just as it has since the war began, Iraq is weakening our ability to fight the war on terrorism.

"The strain that the Iraq war has put on our military has crippled our ability to prosecute the war on terrorism and has dangerously limited our ability to respond to real challenges to our national security around the world.

"Mr. Bush's failed war in Iraq come at a huge cost, first and foremost in human lives, and at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars. It has also had a tremendous cost to reputation, damaging our ability to engage other countries in diplomacy to make the world safer.

"Democrats are proposing a new direction with policies that are tough and smart that will make our country safer, our military stronger, and the world more stable."

http://www.usnewswire.com/

[Monkeyman]

1. Posted this one earlier

http://DemocraticLeader.house.gov

[knowbody0]

2. we should stop calling it

the "war on terrorism" and rename our effort to find peace among all nations. the whole concept of warring with an idea is senseless and makes us look like idiots.

[rodeodance]

12. the concept sticks just like "war on drugs" sticks.

[leesa]

16. Yup. Until we stop using this aggressive, belligerent terminology

and stop invading countries and stealing their stuff, we will forever be fending off "terrorists". We have GOT to stop blathering about a 'War on Terrorism'. It's BS.

[bemildred]

3. The War on Terrorism is and alway has been horseshit.

While I am willing to support Ms Pelosi, she needs to get a clue about that.

[Theduckno2]

8. Agreed, she should frame it as a national security issue,

Something to the effect that prolonged occupation of Iraq threatens our national security. Reduced readiness of our forces, depletion of military stockpiles and the lessening of the aptitude of our soldiers (reduced entrance requirements) are a consequence of the Iraq occupation.

It is also costing us a fortune! :eyes:

[AlamoDemoc]

4. Off topic...but if ever Rep. Murtha challenge Rep. Pelosi as speaker

in november....I will support Rep. Murtha.

[Monkeyman]

5. Second that one even if I get emails from her staffers

[jaysunb]

6. Murtha would be an "ok" Speaker

as would most Democrats....at this point. But, we'd see a much more progressive agenda w/ Pelosi.

[Justitia]

19. Clarification: Murtha plans to run for Majority Leader, not Speaker

If Dems win control of the House, Pelosi will become Speaker of the House.

Murtha has stated his intention to run for the post of Majority Leader, which has pissed off our current whip Steny Hoyer, who seems to think the spot "should" be his by rights.
Hoyer is wrong. It is a spot to be won, not bestowed.
Murtha would be vastly superior to Hoyer in this position.

Pelosi and Murtha are allies and supporters of each other.

[Vidar]

7. Way to buy into the Republican illusion, Nancy.

[JusticeForAll]

9. Give her some credit,,,

For those who keep saying the war on terror is not real, Who do you think people like Nancy is trying to appeal to? People who already KNOW it's not real? nah, she's already won us over.

She is using the Republican's words against themselves. Just because an idea is not real or a statement is untrue, has never stopped the Republicans...yet the Repukelicans always seem to find a way to appeal to less politically savvy and aware. She's doing the same by using words everyone understands (no matter how much "War on Terror" is an illusion to us - it's very real to the people she's reaching out to)

Attempting to frame the War on Terror as an illusion is a losing strategy. It is very elitist sounding to try and sell a concept that runs so counter and contradictory to what the Republicons have invested and propagandized and what so many unenlightened people who are not like us, believe with all their hearts. Making people realize that Bush is a failure at everything including all of these wars (real or unreal) is a pretty smart strategy.

We need to start speaking the language of the people. Like it or not, the concept of the war on terror is here to stay for awhile. When we do, we we will win them over.

Just my opinion.

[Vidar]

11. Good point, I confess.

[The2ndWheel]

15. So this is what we're trying to do?

"We need to start speaking the language of the people."

Now that sounds elitist.

"It is very elitist sounding to try and sell a concept that runs so counter and contradictory to what the Republicons have invested and propagandized and what so many unenlightened people who are not like us, believe with all their hearts."

Also, quite elitist.

"Just because an idea is not real or a statement is untrue, has never stopped the Republicans...yet the Repukelicans always seem to find a way to appeal to less politically savvy and aware. She's doing the same by using words everyone understands"

So you want the Democrats to use ideas and statements that are not real and untrue to gain political power? Did you take a Leo Strauss class in college?

Alright, tell the rabble what they want to hear. Talk to them in their own unenlightened language. They're not like us anyway, what's the difference? Anything for power.

[samsingh]

10. yes it is. are more people starting to catch on?

i like Pelosi, but i hated her line about standing shoulder to shoulder with the president in defending America. How about actually defending the country - clearly something the GOP is unable to do or doesn't want to.

[rodeodance]

13. yes, that is a blooper!

but i hated her line about standing shoulder to shoulder with the president in defending America

[rodeodance]

14. nice headline but SHOULD be in major Newspapers!

[MrPrax]

17. dangerous...stupid...

If she approves the 'war', but not this particular battle, then it is still a vindication of the GOP's aims to "our country safer, our military stronger, and the world more stable."

If anything I imagine this is what Repukes are saying as well -- afterall, their frame would be Iraq was Bush's battle, but the war is best fought by the GOP.

Bush will not being running, so I can imagine McCain using this same line for the same effect ...afterall the democrats agree.

[mike_c]

18. ding ding ding....

This is NOT a good startegy-- dems need to offer real alternatives to republican policies, not promise to out-PNAC the bastards.